From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bank of Florala v. Hall

Supreme Court of Alabama
Feb 14, 1924
99 So. 299 (Ala. 1924)

Opinion

4 Div. 96.

February 14, 1924.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Covington County; W. L. Parks, Judge.

Thigpen, Murphy Jones, of Andalusia, for appellant.

The husband of complainant was a necessary party, and it was error to overrule demurrer taking this point. Cudd v. Reynolds, 186 Ala. 207, 65 So. 41.

Lee Graves, of Montgomery, and J. D. Bailey, of Florala, for appellee.

The court was in error in overruling demurrer, and error is confessed.


Bill by the wife for the cancellation of mortgages on certain real estate, of which she is alleged to be the owner, upon the ground the debt secured is the debt of the husband, and she signed as surety only. Section 4497, Code 1907.

On the face of these mortgages a joint and several liability for the payment of the indebtedness thereby intended to be secured appears to have been assumed by complainant and her husband, T. A. Hall. The husband is not made a party of the bill, and the assignments of demurrer take the point he was a necessary party. It is conceded by counsel for appellee, and correctly so, that these assignments of demurrer were well taken, and should have been sustained under the authority of Cudd v. Reynolds, 186 Ala. 207, 65 So. 41 — a case directly in point.

The decree overruling the demurrer will be reversed, and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

ANDERSON, C. J., and SAYRE and MILLER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Bank of Florala v. Hall

Supreme Court of Alabama
Feb 14, 1924
99 So. 299 (Ala. 1924)
Case details for

Bank of Florala v. Hall

Case Details

Full title:BANK OF FLORALA v. HALL

Court:Supreme Court of Alabama

Date published: Feb 14, 1924

Citations

99 So. 299 (Ala. 1924)
211 Ala. 56

Citing Cases

Hall v. Bank of Florala

THOMAS, J. The bill was against the husband and a mortgagee seeking to cancel and annul certain mortgages on…